<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" href="https://imcjms.com/assets/rss.css" ?><rss version="2.0">
<channel>
    <title>IMC Journal of Medical Science</title>
    <link>https://imcjms.com</link>
    <description>Ibrahim Medical College Journal of Medical Science</description>

                        <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Changes
in corneal endothelial cell density and central corneal thickness in patients
with type 2 diabetes mellitus]]></title>

                                    <author><![CDATA[Umama Islam*]]></author>
                                    <author><![CDATA[Ferdous Akhter Jolly]]></author>
                                    <author><![CDATA[Md. Ferdous Hossain]]></author>
                                    <author><![CDATA[Md. Faizul Ahasan]]></author>
                
                <link data-url="https://imcjms.com/registration/journal_full_text/597">
    https://imcjms.com/registration/journal_full_text/597
</link>
                <pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2026 11:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
                <category><![CDATA[Original Article]]></category>
                <comments><![CDATA[January 2026; Vol. 20(1):004]]></comments>
                <description>Abstract
Background and objectives: The corneal endothelium is essential for maintaining corneal
transparency and visual function. Chronic hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes
mellitus (T2DM) can impair endothelial pump activity, resulting in reduced
endothelial cell density (ECD) and increased central corneal thickness (CCT).
Because endothelial cells do not regenerate, progressive cell loss may lead to
irreversible endothelial decompensation. This study evaluates the association
of T2DM with ECD and CCT and examines how these parameters relate to diabetes
duration, glycaemic control (HbA1c) and diabetic retinopathy (DR).
Materials and methods: This cross-sectional study, conducted at
BIRDEM General Hospital, included 86 patients with T2DM and 86 individuals in
the non-diabetic group. The T2DM group was subdivided by DR status (no DR,
non-proliferative DR and proliferative DR). Following standard ophthalmic
examinations, specular microscopy was performed to measure ECD and CCT in the
right eye. Data were analyzed&amp;nbsp;using t-test, ANOVA, correlation analysis and
multivariate regression (SPSS version 26).
Results: Individuals with
T2DM demonstrated a significant loss of endothelial cells, with mean ECD 275
cells/mm² lower than the non-diabetic group (2585·18 ± 263·12 vs 2860·06 ±
244·45 cells/mm²; p&amp;lt;0·001). CCT did not differ significantly between groups
(527·60 ± 32·93 vs 524·37 ± 40·81 µm; p=0·568). In multivariate regression, age
contributed to a loss of 21·25 cells/mm² per year (p&amp;lt;0·001), while T2DM
independently accounted for an additional loss of 191·12 cells/mm²
(p&amp;lt;0·001). Increasing intraocular pressure (IOP) had no significant effect
on ECD (loss of 15·17 cells/mm² per mmHg; p=0·277).
Conclusion: T2DM is associated
with substantial endothelial cell loss, which is accentuated by longer disease
duration, poor glycaemic control and the presence of DR, whereas CCT remains
unaffected.
January 2026; Vol. 20(1):004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.55010/imcjms.20.004
*Correspondence: Umama Islam, Cornea, LASIK &amp;amp;
Refractive Surgery, Vision Eye Hospital, 229, Green Road, Dhanmondi,
Dhaka-1205.Email: dr.umamaislam@gmail.com.
©
2026 The Author(s). This is an open access article distributed under the terms
of the Creative Commons
Attribution License(CC BY 4.0
&amp;nbsp;
Introduction
Diabetes Mellitus (DM) is a critical
global health issue requiring continuous medical supervision and comprehensive
risk-reduction strategies beyond glucose control [1]. With the growing
prevalence of DM, many organs, including the eyes, are increasingly vulnerable
to damage. While Diabetic Retinopathy (DR) is the most widely recognized ocular
complication, DM also affects the cornea, particularly the corneal endothelium,
causing both structural and functional alterations. These changes may include
reduced endothelial cell density (ECD), altered cell size and shape andincreased
central corneal thickness (CCT), all of which have the potential to impair
vision [2]. The cornea, a transparent tissue essential for transmitting light
to the retina and forming clear retinal images, consists of five layers, with
the endothelium playing a pivotal role in maintaining corneal transparency [3].
Endothelial cells have the highest
density at birth but decline naturally with age at approximately 0.6% per year
[4], a process compensated by increased cell size (polymegathism) and variation
in cell shape (pleomorphism) [5]. DM exacerbates these age-related changes by
causing delayed wound healing, reduced corneal sensitivity and endothelial dysfunction
[2]. Persistent hyperglycaemia contributes to endothelial abnormalities such as
decreased ECD, increased CCT, reduced hexagonality, polymegathism and
pleomorphism [6]. Elevated blood glucose induces aldose reductase activity,
leading to sorbitol accumulation, deposition of advanced glycation end products
(AGEs), endothelial cell loss and impaired corneal transparency [7].
Furthermore, inflammation and oxidative stress associated with DR can disrupt
corneal physiology, further altering endothelial cell morphology and function
[8].
Pan-retinal photocoagulation (PRP), a
standard treatment for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR), may also lead
to endothelial cell damage, reflected by reduced ECD and increased CCT [9].
Specular microscopy, an optical technique that records corneal endothelial reflections,
consistently demonstrates reduced ECD, decreased cell hexagonality and
increased CCT in individuals with DM [10]. Cataract surgery adds further risk
to endothelial integrity, particularly in older patients with DM, where the
natural decline in ECD is compounded by diabetes-related endothelial
vulnerability [11].
Data on
diabetes-related corneal endothelial alterations in Bangladesh remain limited
despite the growing burden of T2DM. Corneal endothelial cell loss and
morphological abnormalities may compromise corneal transparency and increase
the risk of adverse outcomes following intraocular surgery. Assessment of ECD,
CV, HEX and CCT therefore has important clinical relevance in diabetic
populations. This study evaluated corneal endothelial characteristics in
patients with T2DM compared with non-diabetic individuals and examined their
associations with DM duration, HbA1c, DR and relevant ocular parameters. 
&amp;nbsp;
Materials and methods
This cross-sectional study was conducted at BIRDEM General Hospital
between September 2022 and August 2023 and included 86 adults with T2DM and 86
individuals in the non-diabetic group, recruited through consecutive sampling.
Participants were aged 35–60 years and provided written informed consent.
Inclusion required confirmed T2DM for the diabetic group and normal fasting
glucose and HbA1c values for the non-diabetic group. In contrast, individuals
with ocular surface disease, corneal endothelial dystrophy, previous ocular
trauma or surgery, elevated intraocular pressure (IOP), contact lens wear,
ocular infection, long-term topical medication use, or high myopia (&amp;gt;–6.0 D)
were excluded. Ethical approval was obtained from the ethical review committee
of BIRDEM General Hospital. All participants underwent comprehensive right-eye
evaluations including specular microscopy (NIDEK CEM-30, USA), best-corrected
visual acuity testing, intraocular pressure measurement andslit-lamp and fundus
examination. Specular microscopy parameters included endothelial cell density,
average cell area, coefficient of variation, percentage of hexagonal cells and
central corneal thickness. Fasting glucose, 2-hour postprandial glucose and
HbA1c levels of the individuals were assessed as well. Diabetic participants
were categorized into no diabetic retinopathy (no-DR), non-proliferative DR and
proliferative DR groups. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 26 with
Student’s t test and ANOVA for continuous variables, χ² test for categorical
variables and multiple regression analyses to assess relationships, with
significance defined as p&amp;lt;0.05.
&amp;nbsp;
Results
The mean age was significantly higher in the type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM)
group compared with the non-diabetic group (50.88 ± 5.71 vs. 48.35 ± 7.14
years, p = 0.011). Age-group distribution (p = 0.564) and gender (p = 0.360)
did not differ significantly between groups. HbA1c (%)—reported as mean ±
SD—was markedly higher among individuals with T2DM (9.24 ± 2.14%) compared with
non-diabetics (5.91 ± 0.16%, p &amp;lt; 0.001). IOP showed no significant
between-group difference (14.07 ± 1.33 vs. 13.70 ± 1.39mmHg, p = 0.075) (Table-1).
&amp;nbsp;
Table-1: Demographic characteristics, HbA1c
and IOP of the study population (n=172)
&amp;nbsp;
&amp;nbsp;
The ECD was significantly lower in the T2DM group (2585.18 ± 263.12
cells/mm²) compared to the non-diabetic group (2860.06 ± 244.45 cells/mm²,
p&amp;lt;0.001). The coefficient of variation (CV) was significantly higher in the
T2DM group (31.89 ± 4.70%) than in the non-diabetic group (30.19 ± 4.20%,
p=0.013). The percentage of hexagonal cells (HEX) was significantly lower in
the T2DM group (64.52 ± 6.36%) compared to the non-diabetic group (66.95 ±
5.84%, p=0.010). However, there was no significant difference in CCT between
the groups (527.60 ± 32.93 µm vs. 524.37 ± 40.81 µm, p=0.568) (Table-2).
&amp;nbsp;
Table-2: Comparison of endothelial cell
characteristics between two groups.
&amp;nbsp;
&amp;nbsp;
ECD was significantly lower in patients with &amp;gt;10 years of T2DM (2486.69
± 260.93) compared to ≤10 years (2679.20 ± 231.13, p&amp;lt;0.001). Similarly, ECD
declined in those with HbA1c &amp;gt;7.5% (2532.28 ± 262.60) versus ≤7.5% (2730.08
± 207.82, p=0.002). Among DR subgroups, ECD was lowest in PDR cases (2215.27 ±
213.53), followed by NPDR (2589.35 ± 235.67) and no DR (2669.27 ± 213.23,
p&amp;lt;0.001). CCT differences were not statistically significant for duration of
DM (p=0.299), HbA1c levels (p=0.197), or DR status (p=0.929) (Table-3).
&amp;nbsp;
Table-3: Association of ECD and CCT with
the duration of T2DM, HbA1c levels and DR status.
&amp;nbsp;
&amp;nbsp;
Multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that increasing age was
significantly associated with a decrease in ECD (B = -21.247, p&amp;lt;0.001), with
each year contributing to a reduction of approximately 21 cells/mm². T2DM was
also a significant independent predictor of lower ECD (B = -191.124,
p&amp;lt;0.001), indicating a reduction of 191 cells/mm² in diabetic individuals
compared to non-diabetic participants. Intraocular
pressure (IOP) did not show a statistically significant association with ECD (B
= -15.174, p=0.277) (Table-4).
&amp;nbsp;
Table-4: Multivariate
regression analysis of factors influencing corneal ECD (n=172)
&amp;nbsp;
&amp;nbsp;
Discussion
The corneal endothelium plays a central role
in maintaining stromal deturgescence and optical clarity and its dysfunction
poses a risk for postoperative complications and vision loss. Chronic hyperglycaemia
in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) contributes to oxidative stress,
accumulation of advanced glycation endproducts and microvascular compromise,
all of which may impair endothelial structure and function [1]. In this study,
patients with T2DM demonstrated significantly reduced endothelial cell density
(ECD) compared with non-diabetic controls, consistent with previous reports by
Kim and Kim [12] and Jha et al. [13]. These findings underscore the
susceptibility of endothelial cells to metabolic injury and long-term hyperglycaemic
exposure.
Importantly, T2DM was also associated with a
higher coefficient of variation (CV) and reduced hexagonality. These parameters
are clinically meaningful: increased CV reflects greater variability in cell
size (polymegathism), while reduced hexagonality indicates loss of the normal
hexagonal architecture (pleomorphism). Both changes signal endothelial stress
and reduced physiological reserve, even before substantial ECD loss becomes
clinically apparent. Similar alterations have been reported in other diabetic
cohorts [12,13], whereas Kadri et al. found no significant differences [14],
suggesting possible heterogeneity related to ethnicity, glycaemic control,
imaging technique, or disease duration.
Central corneal thickness (CCT) did not differ
significantly between groups, aligning with findings from Çolak et al. [15] and
Sudhir et al. [16]. However, some studies, such as Taşlı et al. [17], have
reported increased CCT in diabetic individuals, possibly reflecting endothelial
pump dysfunction in more advanced disease. The absence of CCT changes in our
cohort suggests relatively preserved deturgescence despite measurable
morphological endothelial alterations.
Longer diabetes duration (≥10 years) and
poorer glycaemic control (HbA1c &amp;gt;7.5%) were associated with significantly
lower ECD, consistent with the cumulative impact of chronic hyperglycaemia
reported by Storr-Paulsen et al. [18]. However, other studies such as Choo et
al. [19] have shown fewerclear associations, highlighting inter-individual
variability in metabolic susceptibility. Additionally, ECD was lowest in
patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR), echoing the findings of
Jha et al. [13], although El-Agamy et al. [20] reported no significant
association. These discrepancies warrant further investigation into the shared
microvascular pathways linking retinopathy severity and endothelial
degeneration.
T2DM is associated with significant corneal
endothelial alterations, including reduced ECD and increased morphological
variability, reflecting diminished endothelial reserve even without increased
CCT. These subclinical changes may predispose patients to postoperative corneal
oedema and delayed visual recovery, underscoring the value of routine
endothelial assessment for surgical planning and risk stratification,
particularly in patients with long-standing DM, poor glycaemic control, or DR.
In conclusion, endothelial compromise can
occur despite normal CCT and incorporating corneal endothelial evaluation into
routine ocular care may optimise perioperative management. 
&amp;nbsp;
Recommendations
Multicentre prospective studies with long-term
follow-up are needed to confirm these findings.
Limitations
This study’s cross-sectional, single-centre
design and moderate sample size limit causal inference and generalisability and
longitudinal changes or postoperative outcomes were not assessed.
&amp;nbsp;
Funding
The study wasself-funded.
&amp;nbsp;
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no financial,
personal, or institutional conflicts of interest that could have influenced the
preparation or outcomes of this study.
&amp;nbsp;
Ethical Approval
Ethical approval was obtained from the
Ethical Review Committee of BIRDEM Academy.
&amp;nbsp;
Reference
1.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; American Diabetes Association. Standards
of care in diabetes-2023&amp;nbsp;abridged for primary care providers. Clin
Diabetes. 2022; 41(1): 4-31. doi:10.2337/cd23-as01.
2.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Ljubimov AV. Diabetic complications in the
cornea. Vision Res. 2017; 139:
138-152. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2017.03.002.
3.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Sahu PK, Das GK, Agrawal S, Kumar S.
Comparative evaluation of corneal endothelium in patients with diabetes
undergoing phacoemulsification. Middle East Afr. J. Ophthalmol. 2017; 24(2): 74-80. doi:10.4103/meajo.MEAJO_242_15.
4.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Zhang K, Zhao L, Zhu C, Nan W, Ding X, Dong
Y, et al. The effect of diabetes on corneal endothelium: a meta-analysis. BMC
Ophthalmol. 2021; 21(1): 78.
doi:10.1186/s12886-020-01785-3.
5.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Ahn YJ, Choi SI, Yum HR, Shin SY, Park SH.
Clinical features in children with posterior polymorphous corneal dystrophy. Optom
Vis Sci. 2017; 94(4): 476-481.
doi:10.1097/OPX.0000000000001039.
6.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Inoue K, Kato S, Inoue Y,
Amano S, Oshika T. The corneal endothelium and thickness in type II diabetes
mellitus. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2002; 46(1):
65-69. doi:10.1016/s0021-5155(01)00458-0.
7.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Thakur S, Gupta SK, Ali V, Singh P, Verma
M. Aldose reductase: a cause and a potential target for the treatment of
diabetic complications. Arch Pharm Res. 2021; 44(7): 655-667. doi:10.1007/s12272-021-01343-5.
8.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Tangvarasittichai O, Tangvarasittichai S.
Oxidative stress, ocular disease and diabetes retinopathy. Curr Pharm Des.
2018; 24(40): 4726-41. doi:10.2174/1381612825666190115121531.
9.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Ostadian F, Farrahi F, Cheraghian B, Nejad
AM. Panretinal photocoagulation laser in diabetic retinopathy patients. Pak
J Med Health Sci. 2021; 15(6): 1820-1823.
doi:10.53350/pjmhs211561820.
10.&amp;nbsp; Islam
QU, Mehboob MA, Amin ZA. Comparison of corneal morphological
characteristics between diabetic and non diabetic population. Pak J Med Sci.
2017; 33(6): 1307-1311.
doi:10.12669/pjms.336.13628.
11.&amp;nbsp; Kudva AA, Lasrado AS, Hegde S, Kadri R, Devika
P, Shetty A. Corneal endothelial cell changes in diabetics versus age group
matched nondiabetics after manual small incision cataract surgery. Indian J
Ophthalmol. 2020; 68(1): 72-76.
doi:10.4103/ijo.IJO_406_19.
12.&amp;nbsp; Kim YJ, Kim TG. The effects of type 2 diabetes
mellitus on the corneal endothelium and central corneal thickness. Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1):
8324. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-87896-3.
13.&amp;nbsp; Jha
A, Verma A, Alagorie AR. Association of severity of diabetic
retinopathy with corneal endothelial and thickness changes in patients with
diabetes mellitus. Eye. 2022; 36(6):
1202-8. doi:10.1038/s41433-021-01606-x.
14.&amp;nbsp; Kadri R, Sasalatti N, Hegde S, Kudva AA,
Parameshwar D, Shetty A. Corneal endothelial cell characteristics and central
corneal thickness in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Ker J of
Ophthalmol. 2021; 33(1): 56-60. doi:10.4103/kjo.kjo_91_20.
15.&amp;nbsp; Çolak S, Kazanci B, Ozçelik Soba D, Ozdamar
Erol Y, Yilmazbas P. Effects of diabetes duration and HgA1C level on corneal
endothelial morphology. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2021; 31(3): 967-975. doi:10.1177/1120672120914812.
16.&amp;nbsp; Sudhir RR, Raman R, Sharma T. Changes in the
corneal endothelial cell density and morphology in patients with type 2
diabetes mellitus: a population-based study, Sankara Nethralaya Diabetic
Retinopathy and Molecular Genetics Study (SN-DREAMS, Report 23). Cornea. 2012; 31(10):
1119-22. doi:10.1097/ico.0b013e31823f8e00.
17.&amp;nbsp; Taşlı
NG, Icel E, Karakurt Y, Ucak T, Ugurlu A, Yilmaz H, et al. The
findings of corneal specular microscopy in patients with type-2 diabetes
mellitus. BMC ophthalmol. 2020; 20(1):
1-7. doi:10.1186/s12886-020-01488-9.
18.&amp;nbsp; Storr‐Paulsen A, Singh A, Jeppesen H,
Norregaard JC, Thulesen J. Corneal endothelial morphology and central thickness
in patients with type II diabetes mellitus. Acta Ophthalmol. 2014; 92(2): 158-160. doi:10.1111/aos.12064.
19.&amp;nbsp; Choo M, Prakash K, Samsudin A, Soong T, Ramli
N, Kadir A. Corneal changes in type II diabetes mellitus in Malaysia. Int J
Ophthalmol. 2010; 3(3): 234-236.
doi:10.3980/j.issn.2222-3959.2010.03.12.
20.&amp;nbsp; El-Agamy
A, Alsubaie S. Corneal endothelium and central corneal thickness changes in
type 2 diabetes mellitus. Clin Ophthalmol. 2017; 11: 481-486. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S126217.
&amp;nbsp;
Cite this article as:
Islam U,
Jolly FA, Hossain MF, Ahasan MF. Changes in corneal endothelial cell density
and central corneal thickness in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. IMC J Med Sci. 2026; 20(1):004.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.55010/imcjms.20.004.</description>

            </item>
            
    <copyright>2026 Ibrahim Medical College. All rights reserved.</copyright>
</channel>
</rss>
